Originally Posted by Mr. H
You are demonstrating very well why these initiatives are totally counter-productive. They are not providing you with a license. The measures are intended to help alleviate the financial impact of piracy.
The fact that most people view these sorts of levies and taxes as a legitimisation of piracy demonstrates that record companies really didn't think things through properly.
If you buy a Zune, that doesn't mean you've bought the right to everything Universal have published. If you buy a blank CD in a country that taxes blank media to compensate publishing companies, that doesn't give you the legal right to pirate music. The existence of the tax doesn't obviate copyright law.
In some cases like photocopying it is actually legalizing the copy of copyrighted materials (for academic purposes) at least in some countries. In those cases the state collects the tax and redistributes it among publishers.
This is a deal between the company that owns a bunch of intellectual property and the one that sells you a device that could play that material. I am shure it is not their intention to legitimate piracy in this case but it is still an argument. After all you would be apying a fee to compensate for piracy when you buy the device.
These thing stinks if you look it in the perspective of someone who is never going put illegal music in their players. Why should they pay for what others do? What value is he getting from that dollar?
In my original post I was trying to be ironic. I know it's not their intention, It may hold for nothing in court but as well it might, and the argument has some merit.
Personally I wouldn't do any illegal downloading if music was easily available for purchase. When it is easier to pay to allofmp3 or using limewire than buying legal music. I live outside the states (and ITMS coutries) and have several times payed in ebay overpriced music itunes cards.
Make it easy, people will buy while they can afford it.